Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Keywords
- Zivilschutz (2) (remove)
New risk geographies are emerging with war and conflict resurfacing, including nuclear threats. This poses challenges to civil protection for conducting risk-informed preparedness planning. A spatial assessment of Germany and Europe is conducted using a geographic information system. Buffer circles of nuclear explosion effects and fallout buffers show potentially exposed areas around major cities. Different scenarios indicate shrinking areas safe from exposure. However, even in a densely populated country, rural areas and smaller cities can be identified that could provide sites for evacuation shelters. Changing wind directions poses a challenge for civil protection planning because fallout risk covers most German territory even when few cities are attacked. However, wind speeds and topography can help identify suitable shelter areas. More knowledge about the temporal development of a nuclear explosion and its specific forms of harm can also help to improve risk knowledge and planning. While nuclear warfare at first seems to render useless any option for safe areas and survival, the spatial risk assessment shows that exposure does not occur at all places at all times. Being safe from harm will be difficult in such a worst-case scenario, but avoiding large city perimeters and being informed can also help reduce risk.
Pluvial floods claimed more than 180 lives in Germany in July 2021, when a large and slow-moving storm system affected Germany and many neighbouring countries. The death tolls and damages were the highest since 1962 in Germany, and soon after, the crisis management was under public critique. This study has undertaken an online survey to understand crisis management better and identify lessons to learn. It has received a positive interest among operational relief forces and other helpers (n = 2264). The findings reveal an overall satisfaction with the operation in general as well as personal lessons learned. It also reveals shortcomings in many areas, ranging from information distribution, coordination, parallel ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, infrastructure resilience, and other factors. Just as well, areas for improvement of the crisis management system are suggested by the respondents. Cooperation and support by the affected population are perceived as positive. This helps to inform other areas of research that are necessary, such as studies on the perception by the affected people. The gaps in assessments of operational forces and some methodological constraints are discussed to advance future follow-up studies.